Solicitation Amendment - W912WJ25RA0010001.pdf

(See ).

SOLICITATION, OFFER,

AND AWARD

(Construction, Alteration, or Repair) IMPORTANT - The "offer" section on the reverse must be fully completed by offeror.

9. FOR

INFORMATION CALL:

NOTE: In sealed bid solicitations "offer" and "offeror" mean "bid and "bidder".

SOLICITATION

1. SOLICITATION NUMBER

5. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQUEST NUMBER

CODE

6. PROJECT NUMBER

8. ADDRESS OFFER TO

4. CONTRACT NUMBER

7. ISSUED BY

10. THE GOVERNMENT REQUIRES PERFORMANCE OF THE WORK DESCRIBED IN THESE DOCUMENTS (Title, identifying number, date)

11. The contractor shall begin performance within

12a. THE CONTRACTOR MUST FURNISH ANY REQUIRED PERFORMANCE AND PAYMENT BONDS?

(If "YES", indicate within how many calendar days after award in Item 12b.)

13. ADDITIONAL SOLICITATION REQUIREMENTS:

a. Sealed offers in original and

b. An offer guarantee

c. All offers are subject to the (1) work requirements, and (2) other provisions and clauses incorporated in the solicitation in full text or by reference.

d. Offers providing less than

STANDARD FORM 1442 (REV. 12/2022)

Prescribed by GSA - FAR (48 CFR) 53.236-1(d) calendar days for Government acceptance after the date offers are due will not be considered and will be rejected.

is, is not required.

local time containing offers shall be marked to show the offeror's name and address, the solicitation number, and the date and time offers are due.

(date). If this is a sealed bid solicitation, offers will be publicly opened at that time. Sealed envelopes copies to perform the work required are due at the place specified in Item 8 by (hour) award, YES NO notice to proceed. This performance period is mandatory negotiable.

calendar days and complete it within calendar days after receiving

a. NAME b. TELEPHONE NUMBER (Include area code) (NO COLLECT CALLS)

12b. CALENDAR DAYS

2. TYPE OF SOLICITATION

SEALED BID (IFB)

INVITATION FOR BID

NEGOTIATED (RFP)

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL

3. DATE ISSUED PAGE OF PAGES

Created On:

14 Mar 2025, 12:31 PM Central Daylight Time

AWARD (To be completed by Government)

17. The offeror agrees to perform the work required at the prices specified below in strict accordance with the terms of this solicitation, if this offer is accepted calendar days after the date offers are due. (Insert any number equal to or greater than the minimum requirement by the Government in writing within stated in Item 13d. Failure to insert any number means the offeror accepts the minimum in Item 13d.)

OFFER (Must be fully completed by offeror)

AMOUNTS

18. The offeror agrees to furnish any required performance and payment bonds.

19. ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF AMENDMENTS

(The offeror acknowledges receipt of amendments to the solicitation -- give number and date of each)

AMENDMENT

NUMBER

DATE

CONTRACTING OFFICER WILL COMPLETE ITEM 28 OR 29 AS APPLICABLE

14. NAME AND ADDRESS OF OFFEROR (Include ZIP Code)

CODE FACILITY CODE

15. TELEPHONE NUMBER (Include area code)

16. REMITTANCE ADDRESS (Include only if different than Item 14.)

20a. NAME AND TITLE OF PERSON AUTHORIZED TO SIGN OFFER (Type or print)

21. ITEMS ACCEPTED:

22. AMOUNT

26. ADMINISTERED BY

30a. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTOR OR PERSON AUTHORIZED TO SIGN (Type or print)

31c. DATE

STANDARD FORM 1442 (REV. 12/2022) BACK

31b. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

BY

31a. NAME OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

29. AWARD (Contractor is not required to sign this document.) Your offer on this solicitation is hereby accepted as to the items listed. This award consummates the contract, which consists of (a) the Government solicitation and your offer, and (b) this contract award. No further contractual document is necessary.

30b. SIGNATURE 30c. DATE

28. NEGOTIATED AGREEMENT (Contractor is required to sign this document and return and deliver all items or perform all work requirements identified on this form and any continuation sheets for the consideration stated in this contract. The rights and obligations of the parties to this contract shall be governed by (a) this contract award, (b) the solicitation, and (c) the clauses, representations, certifications, and specifications incorporated by reference in or attached to this contract.

copies to issuing office.) Contractor agrees to furnish

24. SUBMIT INVOICES TO ADDRESS SHOWN IN

(4 copies unless otherwise specified)

23. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA

ITEM

25. OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION PURSUANT TO THE UNITED STATES

CODE AT

27. PAYMENT WILL BE MADE BY

10 U.S.C. 3204(a) ( ) 41 U.S.C. 3304(a) ( )

20b. SIGNATURE 20c. OFFER DATE

Section 00 00 00 - Procurement and Contracting Requirements

Design Build IDIQ MATOC

NOTICE

Notice to Offerors: This solicitation is a two phase Design-Build solicitation. Currently, this solicitation is for Phase 1 proposals only. Phase 1 submissions will be reviewed and the most highly qualified proposals will be invited to submit Phase 2 proposals. A bid schedule and expanded specifications and details regarding the sample task order will be provided during Phase 2 via a solicitation amendment.

Offerors MUST have an active registration in SAM.gov at the date/time of the solicitation closing in accordance with FAR 52.204-7(b)(1). This includes Joint Venture and partnership offerors.

Proposals must be valid for sixty (60) days from submission.

IDIQ Information:

This contract is a Multiple Award Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Design-Build Contract. The contract shall have a 5 year ordering period and the total amount of the contract shall not exceed $90,000,000 for the entire Multiple Award Task Order Contract (MATOC) pool.

Small Business Set-Aside: The contact is set-aside 100% for small business concerns. The Government intends to award a contract up to five (5) small businesses to form the MATOC pool.

Minimum Guarantee: The Government is obligated to satisfy a minimum guaranteed amount of not less than $10,000 per awardee over the life of the contract.

The Sample Task Order will not be awarded but is representative of some of the work expected under the IDIQ.

Pricing of Task Orders: After award of the base contract, work will be issued through task orders on a firm fixed price basis. Specific task and pricing information for work to be performed under this contract shall be included in each Task Order.

Performance and Payment Bonds will be required for task orders in accordance with 52.228-15 Performance and Payment Bonds--Construction June 2020. Offerors are advised that the forms for the Performance and Payment Bonds were updated in October 2023. The current valid expiration date on the forms is 1/31/2027.

Wage Determinations and Binding Labor Rates: The contract awardee will be required to pay wages in accordance with the applicable wage determinations listed in Requests for Proposals, as updated.

Task order and modification requests for proposal (RFPs) and subsequent awards will include updated wage determinations in compliance with Department of Labor regulations. The contract awardee will also be required to propose pricing on task orders that are the same as its proposed binding rates, submitted as required by this solicitation. Binding rates will be incorporated into the contracts, and all task orders and modification proposals must use the binding rates. The offeror is required to propose five years of binding rates, inclusive of all escalation. No adjustment will be made to binding rates after contract award.

W912WJ25RA0010001

Section 00 01 15 - List of Drawing Sheets

SPECIFICATIONS AND DRAWINGS

To Be Provided in Phase II

Section 00 10 00 - Solicitation, Contract Line Item Number (CLIN) Schedule

Additional Information/Notes

Section 00 21 00 - Instructions

SECTION L

GENERAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

The intent of this solicitation is to select up to five (5) contractors for the D/B MATOC. The Government will evaluate the proposals in accordance with the criteria described herein, and award a firm fixed price contract to the responsible Offeror whose proposal conforms with all the terms and conditions of the solicitation and whose proposal is determined to represent the overall best value to the Government.

The basis of award is the Tradeoff Process. The Contracting Officer will award IDIQ contracts to the responsible Offerors whom the Source Selection Authority (SSA) determines conforms to the solicitation, are fair and reasonable, and offers the best overall value to the Government. The Government reserves the right to accept other than the lowest priced offer or to reject all offers.

PROPOSAL SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS (PIEE):

ALL SUBMISSIONS TO THIS ANNOUNCEMENT SHALL BE SUBMITTEDELECTRONICALLY THROUGH , PIEE SOLICITATION . MODULE SUBMISSIONS MUST BE SUBMITTED VIA THE OPENSOLICITATION ASSOCIATED WITH THIS SOLICITATION

NUMBER. DO NOT SUBMIT IN THE "UNSOLICITED PROPOSALS"SECTION.

Electronic proposal submission is required through theArmy's electronic file sharing service, Procurement Integrated Enterprise Environment (PIEE) ( https://piee.eb.mil/),Solicitation module, open solicitation associated with this solicitationnumber. No paper copies, CD-ROMs, email, or facsimile submissions will be accepted.

Information regarding how to set up a vendor registration is included in this link- https://piee.eb.mil/xhtml/unauth/web/homepage /vendorGettingStartedHelp.xhtml

Information regarding role assignment during vendor registration is included in this link- https://sam.gov/opp/2b0a3d5c4c454beb8fefa3d844544a1d /view

File Size Limitations: Offerors are advised to follow the PIEE instructions for uploading files. PIEE supports delivery up to 1.9 GB per file, with no limit on the number of files, as well as multiple file formats. If needed, Offerors may break the files down into smaller sections in order to upload. In such cases, please divide the sections as logically as possible and be sure to clearly name the files as specified below.

File Naming Convention: To ensure your submission is received and processed appropriately, it is important that interested parties carefully ensure their electronic files adhere to the following naming convention:

W912WJ25RA001- FIRMNAME - VOLUME I

Each file name should begin with the solicitation number followed by the firm's name and a brief file description. Please see examples above.

Upload Completion and Deadline: Interested parties shall submit proposals no later than the date and time specified on the solicitation document. The time and date of proposal receipt will be the upload completion/delivery time and date recorded within the PIEE, Solicitation module, open solicitation associated with this solicitation number. Do not assume that electronic submission will occur instantaneously. Large files(e.g., 10MB or more) will take some time to upload. Offerors should time their upload effort and not wait until the last minute to submit as there may be delays in the transmittal process. Offerors are encouraged to keep a copy of the PIEE upload confirmation for their records.

Proposals sent through proprietary or third-party file transfer sites, email, PIEE modules other than the Solicitation module (open solicitation associated with this solicitation number), or DoD SAFE WILL NOT be retrieved and evaluated. It is the responsibility of the Offeror to confirm timely receipt of proposals. All proposals received, as confirmed by the date/time recorded within the PIEE, Solicitation module after the exact time specified for receipt on the solicitation document, shall be treated as late submissions and will not be considered.

Offerors are reminded of the obligations outlined in FAR 52.219-14, Limitations on Subcontracting. This clause places limits on the amount paid by the Government for contract performance to subcontractors. The contractor will be subject to periodic reporting requirements on its subcontracted efforts. Throughout performance, contractors will be required to provide evidence of compliance including, but not limited to, invoices, copies of subcontracts, and/or a list of the value of tasks performed. (Please note: In reference to FAR 52.219-14, the requirements for "Construction by special trade contractors" applies to all contracts issued under a NAICS code where the first three digits are "238." For example, 238910. Please reference the solicitation block 10 to determine the applicable NAICS code for this procurement.)

This solicitation is anticipated to be awarded to a small business pursuant to FAR Part 19. As required by 15 U.

S.C. 644(w), the Contracting Officer transmits the following notice:

The Department of Defense and Department of the Army have policies or procedures, in addition to that outlined in FAR 43.204, that apply to definitization of equitable adjustments. Relevant information is publicly available at: https://www.usace.army.mil/Business-With-Us/Partnering/

The agency's past performance definitizing construction contract equitable adjustments for change orders is available at: https://usace.contentdm.oclc.org/utils/getfile/collection/p16021coll11/id/6173

2. Proposal Submission Requirements

a. Each volume should be submitted in a digital format. Any pages that are changed (as a result of discussions or proposal revisions) should be of a different color and should have changed information clearly marked by a vertical line in the right margin of the page. The revised pages should be dated. Each volume should be clearly labeled with its title.

b. Each volume should be single spaced. Each paragraph should be separated by at least one blank line. A standard, 12-point minimum font size applies. Arial or Times New Roman fonts are required. Tables and illustrations may use a reduced font size no less than 11-point and may be landscape oriented.

c. The following volumes of material shall be submitted:

VOLUME & TITLE

PAGE

LIMITS

Volume I: Past Performance, Management Approach, & Joint Venture Agreements* 35

Volume II: Technical Approach (Sample Task Order) 20

Volume III: Price, SF1442, Acknowledgement of Amendments, Representations and Certifications

None

NOTE: All pages, including but not limited to cover letters, cover pages, dividers, blank pages, Table of Contents pages, tables, illustrations, and appendices will be counted in the page calculation. Past Performance Questionnaires and/or CPARS reports WILL NOT count against the page limit.

Pages that exceed the above noted page limitations will not be evaluated. Additional pages over the maximum allowed will be removed, not read, and will not be evaluated by the Government. Agreements, letters of commitment, and/or WILL NOT be counted toward Joint Venture Agreements* the page limit, but should be included as an appendix to Volume I.

NOTE: For submission requirements designated as "shall" or "must," failure to provide the requested information will be considered a deficiency and the specified factor will be rated red/unacceptable, and the proposal will be considered un-awardable unless revised. For submission requirements designated as "should," failure to provide the requested information will result in a lower rating for the specified factor and may result in a deficiency and unacceptable rating. Offerors are cautioned that award may be made without discussions and Offerors may not have the opportunity to submit revised proposals.

3. Proposal File Format and Packaging

a. Format. The submission should be clearly indexed and logically assembled. Each volume should be clearly identified and begin at the top of a page. All pages of each volume should be consecutively numbered and identified by the complete company name, date and solicitation number in the header and/or footer. MS Word (doc/docx) files should use the following page setup parameters:

Margins - Top, Bottom, Left, Right - 1"

Gutter - 0"

From Edge - Header, Footer 0.5"

Page Size, Width - 8.5"

Page Size, Height - 11"

b. File Packaging. All of the proposal electronic files shall be submitted in their native formats (e.g., docx, xlsx, ppt) and uploaded electronically to the PIEE website. CDs, DVD, Zip disks or USB drives are not permitted. **Please note - Self extracting exe files are not acceptable. ** In addition, copies of all files in PDF format shall also be provided. All price breakdown information to aid in the price evaluation shall be submitted in Microsoft Office Excel Read/Write format and viewable in Microsoft Excel 2007.

SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

Phase I -Volume I - Factor 1 - Past Performance

Offerors shall submit no more than five (5) projects. Each must have been completed within the last seven (7) years, as evidence of recent and relevant experience. If the project was not completed within the last seven (7) years, that project will be designated as "Not Relevant." For the purposes of this solicitation, seven (7) years shall be determined from the initial solicitation date. Project relevancy will be determined by those projects which demonstrate successful completion in performing the requirements identified below. All project information shall be presented in narrative form. Any charts or other graphics used to show areas of similarity (e.g., checklists) will not be reviewed by the SSEB. The roles and responsibilities of work performed by the Offeror's team members will be considered when determining relevancy and should be clearly marked.

Recent and relevant experience of the Designer of Record (DOR) must be demonstrated in the projects. No more than two (2) projects may be submitted that are specific to the DOR alone ( not in partnership with the i.e., proposed construction contractor).

A project is defined as a construction project performed under a single task order or contract which included both design and construction of the project. For multiple award and indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity type contracts, the contract as a whole should not be submitted as a project; rather, Offerors should submit the work performed under a task order as a project.

The Government may use data provided by the Offeror in its proposal, and data obtained from other sources, including data in Government files. The Government reserves the right to obtain past performance information from any source available and has the right to contact customers other than those listed by the Offeror to evaluate past performance. The Government reserves the right to verify statements the Offeror makes regarding its past performance to determine whether they are substantiated.

NOTE: The maximum number of projects that may be submitted is five (5).If more than five (5) projects are submitted, only the first five (5) projects will be evaluated.

For all submitted projects, ensure submission includes the following information:

- Project description;

- Type of contract (e.g., Design -Bid (DB) (indicating role), design for a Design-Bid-Build (DBB) contract, construction of a DBB);

- Role on the contract (i.e. Prime or Sub foreach member of the proposed team who participated in the project execution);

- Month/year that both the design and construction phases started and completed (as applicable);

- Total contract award value and final cost of construction (if Prime) and the value of the work specifically performed by the prime and each relevant team subcontractor involved in the project;

- Physical size of the designed facility;

- Specialized design and construction features of the project; and

- Customer's point-of-contact who can be reached for references (phone number and email address).

For each project, Offerors should submit past performance information as follows:

1. For Federal Government projects with a Past Performance Information Retrieval System/Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) Evaluation: provide the contract number, contract place of performance, and DUNS number. In the case of Indefinite Delivery type contracts, GSA contracts, and Blanket Purchase Agreements, include Task or Delivery Order Numbers.

2. For non-Federal Government projects, commercial projects, and Federal Government projects without a CPARS Evaluation: provide a Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) (Attachment A). The Offeror should complete Blocks 1-4 of the PPQ and send it to the non-Federal project client or commercial project client. The client should complete Blocks 5-8 along with the two-page questionnaire. The Offeror should include the PPQ in Volume I of the proposal. If the client previously completed a PPQ for the project, the Offeror may submit the existing PPQ or obtain an updated/new PPQ from client.

The standard PPQ for USACE is Form PPQ-0(9/30/11) provided in the solicitation. In cases where the validity of the completed PPQ is questioned, contracting personnel may contact the reference for verification or additional information. The Offeror may retain PPQs in its files for submission on future procurements. USACE does not intend to create or maintain a database of PPQs submitted by Offerors. Therefore, it will be the Offeror's responsibility to ensure the submission of PPQs in its proposal that are relevant to the solicitation.

If the Offeror is a Joint Venture (JV), relevant project experience shall be submitted for projects completed by the JV entity. If the JV does not have experience, projects shall be submitted for each JV partner.

As applicable, Offerors shall submit a signed copy of their current joint venture agreement, partnership agreement, teaming agreement, approved mentor-protege agreement, or letter of commitment for each above member of the Offeror's team (in an Appendix to Volume I) in order to receive credit for their experience and/or past performance. In addition, if Offerors have an approved DoD Mentor-Protege or U.S. Small Business Administration Agreement, Offerors should include it.

If an Offeror is utilizing past performance of affiliates, subsidiaries, parent, LLC, LTD member companies (i.e.

Offeror's name is not exactly as stated on the SF 1442), the proposal should clearly demonstrate how that affiliate/subsidiary/parent firm will have meaningful involvement in the performance of this contract. The relevant consideration is whether the resources of the parent or affiliated company - its workforce, management, facilities, and/or other resource - will be provided or relied upon for contract performance, such that the parent or affiliate will have meaningful involvement in contract performance. The proposal must demonstrate similarity of the parent or affiliate's proposed role on this procurement and the parent or affiliate's proposed role submitted for past performance in order to receive credit for the parent or affiliate's past performance.

New Corporate Entities. New corporate entities may submit data on prior contracts involving its officers and employees. However, in addition to the other requirements in this section, the Offeror shall discuss in detail the role performed by such persons in the prior contracts cited. Information on their proposed roles should be included in the project descriptions submitted in response to the solicitation requirements.

Phase I -Volume I - Factor 2 - Management Approach

This section shall contain the Offeror's Management Approach. The Offeror's Management Approach shall include, at a minimum:

1) An expanded organizational chart and supporting narrative description of the Offeror's overall structure and management of the project team from the Offeror's Headquarters to the Offeror's site office(s). The chart and narrative must:

- Identify all offices anticipated to be involved in this contract.

- Identify the primary DOR who will be responsible for projects to be performed under this contract.

- Identify positions by title, organization, and physical location and how they are related, to include all proposed team members, including in-house personnel, subcontractors and consultants, including lines of reporting and technical areas of responsibility under the contract.

- Clearly show the lines of authority of the Offeror's proposed key personnel, including all JV Partners and proposed subcontractors, where applicable.

2) A narrative describing the Management Approach which, at a minimum, includes:

- The typical planned approach to: start-up/mobilization; design development; construction administration; cost and schedule control; coordination and management of in-house personnel and subcontractors; and coordination with USACE and stakeholders.

- How the offeror intends to work with JV partners and/or its proposed subcontracting approach, including documentation of relevant experience (length of time and number of projects) working with team subcontractors and/or JV partners.

- Identification of key personnel who will perform the following functions on task orders issued under the IDIQ contract: Project Manager and Design Manager. The Project Manager must be employed directly by the prime contractor.

- A description of the duties, roles, major responsibilities, and authorities for all critical personnel/job titles.

- A description of interactions within the team and with USACE during the design and construction phases.

- A description of the role of the construction team members, including in-house personnel, subcontractors and consultants, during design.

- A description of the role and interaction of the design team with the construction team during construction, addressing, at a minimum: maintaining coordinated management of the design during construction, to include control and approval of revisions and changes to the accepted design; notification to USACE of design changes; coordination of requests for information, shop drawing and submittal reviews and approvals; attendance of progress meetings and site visits; periodic on-site visits by the design team members to observe progress of construction and to ensure that construction is in conformance with the design intent and contract completion, as-built and close-out documentation.

3) A discussion on how the Offeror will ensure quality consistently across the team during design and construction. Discuss quality control lines of authority between subcontractors and prime.

Offerors should identify any additional and/or unique management advantages its proposal provides to the Government.

4) Identification of the depth of design and construction staff amongst each of the proposed team members (including in-house personnel, subcontractors, and consultants), demonstrating the capacity to execute the full value of the contract over the ordering period- accomplishing multiple task orders concurrently while maintaining quality and schedule. This information shall be presented using a table indicating number of employees by discipline for the Prime, JV partners, and each subcontractor and consultant, and each office location that is intended to be utilized to support the contract.

Phase II - Vol. II - Factor 3 - Technical Approach (Sample Task Order)

Factor 3 will be rated using the adjectival ratings shown in the Technical Assessment Ratings table.

This volume titled "Phase 2, Volume II, Technical Information" shall contain the Offeror's proposed Technical Approach for the Sample Task Order. The Offeror shall provide a clear narrative and design drawings to describe the following site/building design and engineering system features:

1) Civil/Site - Due to the constraint of the physical size of the site and the proximity to the existing actively operating facility, the proposal shall describe the contractor's approach for construction clearances and circulation; staging and storage; topographic and utility surveys; and the proposed plans to limit impact to dam operations to include parking and access, due to construction activities.

2) Geotechnical/Structural - The proposal shall describe the contractor's approach to conducting subsoil exploration and evaluation to determine depth of bedrock and for foundation design. Also, the proposal shall describe the contractor's approach to designing the foundation to minimize rock removal; provide the desired dry basement space; mitigate radon; and minimize adverse impact to the adjacent building and operation of the facility. Describe building overall framing and its lateral load resisting system.

3) Architectural - Describe the proposed exterior building facade and proposed interior layout and how it meets or exceeds solicitation requirements. The proposal shall describe the design, including the functional relationship of the proposed floor plans, barrier free access and building finishes that are durable and low maintenance. The proposal shall include a discussion on building design in compliance with UFC 1-200 High Performance and Sustainable Building Requirements to the greatest extent possible while being cost effective.

4) Mechanical - Describe the proposed engineering mechanical solutions as to how they meet or exceed the solicitation requirements for the HVAC system, distribution and controls, as well as the plumbing system on the potable water treatment system, sanitary and storm water discharge.

5) Electrical - Describe the proposed engineering electrical solutions as to how they meet or exceed the solicitation requirements for normal and emergency power, interior and exterior site lighting, telecommunications, and fire alarm. Describe provisions to accommodate the operation's future plan of consolidating the facility's electrical meters into a single one with net metering from the solar array field.

6) The technical information shall also note any improvements exceeding the solicitation requirements or betterments provided, as outlined in the RFP documents.

Phase II - Vol. III - Factor 4 - Price and Pro Forma Information

The offeror shall submit the proposed ID/IQ Contract Binding Rates; the Bid Schedule for the Sample Task Order; and the Offeror's Sample Task Order Price Proposal Breakdown used to develop the pricing in the Bid Schedule for the Sample Task Order. There are no page limitations for this volume.

1) Contract Binding Rates

Each offeror shall submit binding hourly rates for the following critical Key Personnel:

- Project Manager

- Design Manager

- Architect/Architectural Engineer

- Contractor Quality Control (CQC) Manager

- Site Safety and Health Officer (SSHO)

The contracts will be issued for a five-year ordering period. Binding hourly rates for each of these personnel must be submitted in accordance with the following schedule:

MATOC Year Binding Rate Schedule

Year 1 Date of Award to 30 September 2026

Year 2 01 October 2026 to 30 September 2027

Year 3 01 October 2027 to 30 September 2028

Year 4 01 October 2028 to 30 September 2029

Year 5 01 October 2029 to Contract Completion

These rates will become a part of the contract and shall be used in pricing the Sample Task Order and all task orders for the life of the contract. Binding rates should be burdened with taxes, insurance, and home office overhead but shall not include job site overhead or profit. Offerors shall use the table in the "Binding Rates" tab of the Government-provided Excel spreadsheet (Attachment C) to submit their binding rates. Upon contract award, the binding rates will be incorporated into the contract and will not be renegotiated.

2) Sample Task Order Bid Schedule

The Offeror's proposed Price for the Sample Task Order should be presented as Firm Fixed Price, using the Bid Schedule (Attachment B) provided in the RFP. No unauthorized alterations to the bid schedule will be allowed, and the Offerors must submit pricing for all line items. The labor rates for critical key personnel/job titles utilized in the Sample Task Order Bid Schedule shall be the same as the labor rates the Offeror submits for those same critical key personnel/job titles in its Contract Binding Rates.

3) Price Proposal Breakdown used to Develop Prices on Sample Task Order Bid Schedule

Offerors shall also submit their price proposal breakdown used to develop their pricing shown on the Sample Task Order Bid Schedule. At a minimum, offerors need to show a breakdown of all labor, material, equipment, sub-bids, and indirect costs, including markups, of each sub-task of the Sample Task Order. Offerors need to show how they calculated the Sample Task Order price, accurately indicating how all cross total up to the costs proposed on the Bid Schedule. Price Proposal Breakdowns need to show that binding rates submitted for the ID /IQ Contract Binding Rates were utilized in the Sample Task Order Bid Schedule. Binding rates and all costs shown on the worksheets need to be clearly traceable to the Sample Task Order Bid Schedule Line Items.

Format, level of detail, and software for estimating is not prescribed, but the Price Proposal Breakdown shall present an organized Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) of sufficient detail and depth of major features of work, labor costs, material costs, equipment cost, subcontract costs, and all other indirect costs, including mark-ups.

The WBS and prices within shall total up without error (other than minor rounding errors) into that of the Sample Task Order Bid Schedule.

For proposal preparation purposes, the expected or approximate date for initiation of contract performance is 01 October 2025.

The resulting contracts will be Multiple Award Task Order Contracts (MATOCs). The Offeror shall ensure that the information submitted in this volume is consistent with and fully supports the amounts set forth in the SF1442 and bid schedule.

1) Each Offeror is required to complete (in entirety) the Sample Task Order's Bid Schedule provided in the solicitation.

2) Each Offeror shall complete (fill-in and signatures) the sections indicated below:

- Standard Form 1442 (SF 1442), Solicitation, Offer and Award

- Acknowledgement of Amendments, if any

- Contract Administration Data - Bidding Schedule

- Representations, Certification and Other Statements of Offerors

Joint Venture and Mentor-Protege Agreements

If more than one contractor is listed in Block 14, or the Offeror listed in Block 14 is a joint venture (JV), then a signed JV agreement must be submitted with the proposal and the Offeror shall be registered in the System for Award Management (SAM) as a legal entity separate from the individual joint venture members. However, each member of the JV must submit its own Unique Entity Identifier (formally DUNS number) with the proposal.

SECTION M

BASIS OF AWARD

The award will be made based on the best value proposal that is determined to be the most beneficial to the Government, with appropriate consideration given to the four (4) evaluation factors, listed in descending order of importance: Past Performance, Management Approach, Technical Approach (Sample Task Order), and Price.

Offerors will be cautioned that the award may not necessarily be made to the lowest price Offeror. All evaluation factors other than Price, when combined, are significantly more important than Price.

FACTORS TO BE EVALUATED

The following evaluation factors will be used to evaluate each proposal: Award will be made to the Offeror whose proposal is most advantageous to the Government based upon an integrated assessment of the evaluation factors described below.

Phase 1 will consist of the following two (2 non-Price evaluation factors):

Factor 1: Past Performance

Factor 2: Management Approach

The Phase 1 evaluation factors are in descending order of importance.

NOTE: Offerors should not assume that they will have an opportunity to clarify or correct anything in their Phase 1 submittals.

Following SSEB evaluation of the responsive Phase 1 submittals, up to six (6) of the most highly qualified Offerors in Phase 1 will be invited to submit proposals for Phase 2, where they will then submit their technical and price proposal for the Sample Task Order and IDIQ Contract Binding rates over the five (5) years of the Contract.

Phase 2 will consist of the following two (2) evaluation factors:

Factor 3. Technical Approach (Sample Task Order)

Factor 4: Price

Evaluation of the Offeror's proposal shall address each factor as it applies to the Submission Requirements and Evaluation Criteria contained in the RFP. A detailed explanation of the criteria for the evaluation is set forth in the "Evaluation Approach," of this section. During evaluations of each proposal, the Government will assign each factor an adjectival rating and write a narrative evaluation reflecting the identified findings.

The Government will award one contract each, to up to five (5) Offerors with the best overall proposals that are determined to represent the best value to the Government, with appropriate consideration given to the technical and price proposals. To receive consideration for award, a rating of no less than "Acceptable" on the technical factors and "Satisfactory" or "Neutral" on Past Performance must be achieved.

Proposal Evaluation Process

1. A Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) comprised of representatives of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) will evaluate the proposals. Offerors are advised that the technical evaluation and rating of proposals will be conducted in strict confidence. Technical proposals will be reviewed and rated without knowledge of the price offered. The number and identities of Offerors are not revealed to anyone who is not involved in the evaluation and award process or to other Offerors. Proposals will be evaluated based on the factors described herein, and the basis of award is the Tradeoff Process.

2. The evaluation process essentially consists of four parts: proposal compliance review, technical evaluation, price evaluation, and price/technical trade-off analysis.

a. : This is an initial review to ensure that all required forms and certifications are complete and that both a Proposal Compliance Review technical and price proposal were received.

b. : The SSEB will evaluate and rate the technical proposals (i.e., Volumes I and II) against the RFP requirements.Technical Evaluation Some factors will be rated using an adjectival-based system (Outstanding, Good, Acceptable, Marginal, Unacceptable). Past Performance will be rated based on confidence in performance, with the final confidence assessment rating based on the extent of recent, relevant past experience, and how well the Offeror performed on that experience.

c. : The Price Evaluation Board (PEB) and SSA will evaluate price proposals independent of the technical evaluation. The Price Evaluation SSEB will not have access to price information until completion of the technical evaluation.

d. : After all above evaluations are complete, the SSA will compare the relative advantages and Price/Technical Trade-off Analysis disadvantages of technical proposals and compare prices. The SSA will then consider all factors to select the proposals offering the best value to the Government.

Proposal Information and Related Evaluation Factors

1. Proposals will be evaluated in accordance with the factors below, listed in relative order of importance.

NOTE: To be eligible for award, Factor 1, Past Performance, must be rated at least Satisfactory or

All non-price factors, when Neutral Confidence, and Factors 2 and 3 must be rated at least "Acceptable."

combined, are significantly more important than price. The Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without discussions with Offerors (except clarification as described in FAR 15.306 (a)). Therefore, the Offeror's initial proposal should contain the Offeror's best terms from a price and technical standpoint. The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the Contracting Officer later determines them to be necessary.

Factor 1 - Past Performance Most Important

Factor 2 - Management Approach 2nd Most Important

Factor 3 - Technical Approach (Sample Task Order) 3rd Most Important

Factor 4 - Price 4th Most Important

2. Ratings

Evaluators will apply the adjectival rating for the definition that most closely matches the evaluation.

Past Performance Relevancy Ratings

Rating Definition

Very Relevant Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Relevant Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Somewhat Relevant Present/past performance effort involved some of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Not Relevant Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Past Performance

Confidence Assessments

Ratings

Rating Definition

Substantial Confidence

Based on the Offeror's recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a high expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Satisfactory Confidence

Based on the Offeror's recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Neutral Confidence

No recent/relevant performance record is available or the Offeror's performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned.

The Offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past performance.

Limited Confidence

Based on the Offeror's recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a low expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

No Confidence Based on the Offeror's recent/relevant performance record, the Government has no expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Technical Assessment

Ratings

Adjectival Rating

Definition

Outstanding Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Good Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low to moderate.

Acceptable

Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Marginal Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet requirements of the solicitation, and thus, contains one or more deficiencies, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is unacceptable. Proposal is unawardable.

Definitions

1. A material failure of a proposal to meet a Government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses in a proposal Deficiency.

that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level. See FAR 15.001.

2. An aspect of an Offerors' proposal that has merit or exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will Strength.

be advantageous to the Government during contract performance.

3. An aspect of an Offerors' proposal that has appreciable merit or appreciably exceeds specified performance or Significant Strength.

capability requirements in a way that will be appreciably advantageous to the Government during contract performance.

4. A flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. See FAR 15.001.Weakness.

5. A flaw in the proposal that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. See FAR Significant Weakness.

15.001.6.

6. . Uncertainty Any aspect of a non-cost/price factor proposal for which the intent of the Offeror is unclear (e.g., more than one way to interpret the offer or inconsistencies in the proposal indicating that there may have been an error, omission or mistake).

7. . Clarification Limited exchanges between the Government and Offerors that may occur when award without discussions is contemplated. See FAR15.306(a)(1).

8. . Adverse Past Performance Past performance information that supports a less than satisfactory rating from sources where the information is from other than formal rating systems such as "PPIRS" or "FAPPIS."

9. . Exchanges between the Government and the Offerors that are undertaken with the intent Discussions of allowing the Offeror to revise its proposal.

Phase I -Volume I - Factor 1 - Past Performance

Factor 1 will be rated using the ratings shown in the Past Performance Confidence Assessment Table ratings.

For Past Performance, the Government is assessing (1) the degree of how similar (relevant) the Offeror's recent past performance effort is compared to the scope and size, and the effort and complexities this solicitation requires, and (2) how the Offeror performed on that effort. For this procurement, Offerors may demonstrate similar past performance effort by submitting projects that demonstrate new construction, renovation, or both, as defined below. In order for Past Performance to be rated at least Satisfactory Confidence, Offerors will need to demonstrate successful recent completion of both (i) at least one similar new construction project, as defined below, and (ii) at least one similar renovation project, as defined below; or alternatively, successful recent completion of one project that includes both new construction and renovation.

The SSEB will first evaluate the relevancy of recent past performance identified in the proposal in response to Phase I-Factor I- Past Performance submission requirement to determine how similar a past project is compared to the scope and size, and to the magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires, by using the following criteria:

- Project description;

- Type of contract (e.g., Design -Bid (DB) (indicating role), design for a Design-Bid-Build (DBB) contract, construction of a DBB);

- Role on the contract (i.e. Prime or Sub foreach member of the proposed team who participated in the project execution):

- Month/year that both the design and construction phases started and completed (as applicable);

- Total contract award value and final cost of construction (if Prime) and the value of the work specifically performed by the prime and each relevant team subcontractor involved in the project;

- Physical size of the designed facility;

- Specialized design and construction features of the project; and

- Customer's point-of-contact who can be reached for references (phone number and email address).

The SSEB will next review how well the Offeror performed on those projects. The Government reserves the right to check any or all cited references to verify supplied information and to assess owner satisfaction. In addition to the information submitted by the Offeror, the Government may review any other sources of relevant information for evaluating past performance, including projects other than those submitted by the Offeror. The Government will review past performance information retrieved through the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), including Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), using all CAGE/Unique Entity Identifiers (formerly DUNS number) identified in the Offeror's proposal. Other sources of information for evaluating past performance may include, but are not limited to, past performance information retrieved from inquiries of owner representative(s), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), and any other known sources not provided by the Offeror.

The SSEB will assign a final, overall Performance Confidence rating to each Offeror based on the SSEB's assessment of (1) the extent of the Offeror's recent, relevant experience, and (2) how well the Offeror performed that experience. The assessment will consider the extent of relevancy and/or recency of prior contract effort, along with the quality of performance on those contracts, to arrive at a single final performance confidence assessment rating.

For purposes of this evaluation, projects will be compared to the following criteria to determine relevancy.

Projects that meet more criteria may be considered more relevant:

- A single project which includes both the design and construction (aka Design-Build) of a new, multi-story facility;

- Designed and constructed in accordance with Unified Facilities Criteria (UFC) and using Unified Facilities Guide Specifications (UFGS);

- Multi-discipline project teams*;

- Have a project value of at least $5.0M or greater; and

- Work performed for U.S. Federal Government.

*Multi-discipline project teams consist of at least three (3) of the following disciplines. Projects that include more than three (3) of the listed disciplines may be rated higher:

- Civil/Site

- Structural

- Architectural

- Mechanical

- Electrical

- Fire Protection/Life Safety

Projects completed for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers or on U.S. Military Installations may be considered more relevant than those completed for other U.S. Federal Government agencies or private entities.

NOTE: Projects demonstrating experience of the DOR that also demonstrate prior successful experience working together with the proposed construction contractor may receive higher consideration.

NOTE: The past performance of individuals (e.g. key personnel) will not be credited under the Past Performance factor.

NOTE: Where no recent/relevant performance record is available or the Offeror's performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned, the Offeror will receive a Neutral Confidence (neutral) rating. This rating is neither favorable nor unfavorable.

Phase I -Volume I - Factor 2 - Management Approach

In order to be considered "Acceptable," Offerors must demonstrate an understanding of the specific requirements in the RFP documents and the ability to accomplish them. Prior to assigning an adjectival rating for this factor, the Government will consider whether and to what extent the management approach:

1) Clearly defines, both narratively and graphically, the planned organization structure.

2) Clearly defines which firm/entity will be the DOR for projects to be performed under this contract. The contractor may recommend using a different DOR for separate Task Orders, as appropriate (depending on the project specific requirements).